consistent and worthy of credit, that their ancestors resided many centuries ago in a very distant country in the western part of the American Continent. For some reason now forgotten, they determined on migrating to the eastward. After a long journey they at length arrived on the Mississippi where they fell in with the Iroquois, who had likewise emigrated from a distant country and had struck upon this river somewhat higher up. Their object was the same as that of the Lenape; they were proceeding to the eastward until they should find a country that pleased them. With this nation they formed a confederacy and united their forces against another nation, whom they found in the country eastward of the Mississippi, and whom they expelled from their territory driving them down the Mississippi, (p. 384). Such are the Indian traditions most worthy of reliance as most consistent with probability, and for the natives of North America they clearly point out various tides of immigration from the north-eastern parts of Asia, from Tartary and Siberia, to give them a Mongolian type. Another family of Americans were the Iroquois of whom Dr. Prichard gives fewer details, contenting himself with assimilating them to the Algonquins, though speaking an entirely different language, as all do from the Esquimaux, the most northern people of the Continent, who again are found all along the North of Asia, as well as of America. These then I contend all had their origin from the northern and north-eastern parts of Asia, being essentially of the type termed Mongolian, though coming probably from different parts of the Asiatic Continent and at different periods, they had come with different idioms, and had become more or less affected by the climate of America. It cannot be expected that we should be able to attain to much more than probability with respect to the origin of uncivilized nations, when we know how difficult it is to attain to any with respect to the most civilized. But the whole body and soul of Ethnology may be laid down as dependent on the doctrine that man is a migratory animal. Different from the lower animals, he is not restricted to any climate, but can make himself the denizen of all. We are yet in the infancy of our Science, but I for one have faith in her capabilities to prove from the languages alone of different nations her right to be classed even among the exact sciences. In this view of the case, I feel persuaded that further research will reward the labor of those who compare the languages of North America with those of North Asia, looking on this demonstration as the strongest argument of affinity, though at the same time giving due weight to all
